📚 Topic Summary
Employment Division v. Smith (1990) is a pivotal Supreme Court case concerning religious freedom. The case involved two Native American employees who were fired for using peyote, a hallucinogenic drug, during religious ceremonies. They were subsequently denied unemployment benefits. The Supreme Court ruled that a state does not need to accommodate religious practices when a law is neutral and generally applicable, even if the law burdens a particular religion. This decision narrowed the scope of the Free Exercise Clause, shifting the standard from strict scrutiny to a more deferential approach.
In essence, the Smith decision means that if a law applies equally to everyone and is not specifically designed to target religious practices, it is constitutional even if it incidentally affects religious exercise. This ruling represented a significant departure from previous jurisprudence and has been the subject of much debate and legislative attempts to restore a stricter standard of review for free exercise claims.
🧠 Part A: Vocabulary
Match the term to its correct definition:
| Term |
Definition |
| 1. Free Exercise Clause |
A. Standard used to determine if a law violates constitutional rights. |
| 2. Neutral Law |
B. A law that does not target religious practices specifically. |
| 3. Generally Applicable Law |
C. First Amendment provision protecting the right to practice religion freely. |
| 4. Strict Scrutiny |
D. A law that applies to everyone, regardless of their beliefs or affiliations. |
| 5. Peyote |
E. A hallucinogenic drug used in some Native American religious ceremonies. |
(Answers: 1-C, 2-B, 3-D, 4-A, 5-E)
✍️ Part B: Fill in the Blanks
Complete the following paragraph with the correct terms:
In Employment Division v. Smith, the Supreme Court held that the Free Exercise Clause does not require a state to grant a religious exemption from a __________ and __________ law. This decision limited the scope of religious freedom by establishing that if a law is not aimed at __________ religious practices and applies __________, it is constitutional, even if it burdens religious exercise.
(Answers: neutral, generally applicable, targeting, equally)
🤔 Part C: Critical Thinking
Do you agree with the Supreme Court's decision in Employment Division v. Smith? Explain your reasoning, considering the balance between individual religious freedom and the government's interest in enforcing laws that apply to everyone.